RE RSH

RE RSH

Both summonses were dismissed because the sought photocopied documents and helper statements were not directly alluded to and were irrelevant to the limited issues at a Part II inquiry assessing capacity and protective measures; the court would not exercise its discretion to order production under Order 24 Rule 11(1).

Citation
RE RSH
Parties
Applicant: Applicant (gardener); Alleged Mentally Incapacitated Person: RSH; Relative/opposing Party: Son; Relative/opposing Party: Daughter; Interim Receiver/representative for RSH: Official Solicitor; Companion of Rsh/alleged Interested Party: Lady companion
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
1 September 2006
Case Number
HCMP592/2006
Procedural Posture
Part II Mental Health Ordinance Inquiry / Pre Inquiry Interlocutory (decision on Summonses for Production of Documents)
Outcome
Two summonses dismissed
Legal Topics
Production of Documents, Discovery and Inspection, Interim Receivership, Capacity Assessment, Court Discretion in Part II Proceedings
Source Language
EN
Mental Health Law Civil Procedure Guardianship and Receivership Family Law Production of Documents Discovery and Inspection Interim Receivership Capacity Assessment +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Applicant (gardener)

Applicant

RSH

Alleged Mentally Incapacitated Person

Son

Relative/opposing Party

Daughter

Relative/opposing Party

Official Solicitor

Interim Receiver/representative for RSH

Lady companion

Companion of Rsh/alleged Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Part II Mental Health Ordinance Inquiry / Pre Inquiry Interlocutory (decision on Summonses for Production of Documents)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Order 24 Rule 10(2) was engaged by the daughter\'s affidavit
  2. 2 Whether the court should order production under Order 24 Rule 11(1) of photocopied documents
  3. 3 Whether statements given to solicitors by domestic helpers are necessary for fair disposal and relevant to mental capacity issues

Ratio Decidendi

Both summonses were dismissed because the sought photocopied documents and helper statements were not directly alluded to and were irrelevant to the limited issues at a Part II inquiry assessing capacity and protective measures; the court would not exercise its discretion to order production under Order 24 Rule 11(1).

Court Disposition

Two summonses dismissed

Orders

  • Summons for notice/inspection under Order 24 Rule 10(2) dismissed
  • Summons seeking production of statements from Messrs. P.C. Woo & Co dismissed; no order made under Order 24 Rule 11(1)